Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 2000-06-28 i f �� � 6r. ,.,- r� ' C�thedr�l it s � CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY � �; � a� MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT ACENCY � t � WEDNESDAY�JUNE 28�2000 � This meeting of the City Council, also sitting as the Redevelopment Agency, `� was called to order by Mayor/Chairman Gary L. Amy in the Council Chamber at ' 68-700 Avenida Lalo Guerrero, Cathedral City, California, on June 28, 2000, at > the 3:00 p.m. Study Session with Roll Call of all members present. The regular � evening meeting held at 7:30 p.m., was opened by Mayor/Chairman Amy with an invocation by Councilmember/RDA Board Member Gregory S. Pettis, � followed by the flag salute led by Mayor Pro Tem/RDA Board Member Sarah Di ° Grandi. , � � � ROLL CAtL: =a Present: Councilmembers/RDA Board Members Kathleen De Rosa, Robert Gomer, Gregory S. Pettis, Mayor Pro Tem/RDA ' = Board Member Sarah Di Grandi, and Mayor/Chairman Gary � ' L. Amy � Absent: None � � ACENDA FINALIZATION � Councilmember/RDA Board Member De Rosa requested that Consent Agenda Item Nos. 1, 2 and 4 be pulled for further discussion. Mayor Amy announced that Public Hearing Item No. 5 will be opened for comments and then � continued to the meeting of July 12, 2000. CLOSED SESSION: �. PERSONNEL MATTER pursuant to Government Code SeCtion 54957. � Issue for Discussion: 1) Cathedral City Public Safety Management � Association (CCPSMA); 2) Cathedral City Firefighters Association (CCFFA) ;� 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, Subd. (b)(1). Number of Cases: Three :� � � { � � ; � � CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 � PAGE 2 � 3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 � Property: � � Location: 68759 "B" Street APN �687 '� Negotiating Parties: � Agency: Redevelopment Agency � ;� Property Owner: HUD `' Under Negotiation: Property Acquisition .:, � ; 4. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government � Code Section 54956.8 '' Property: � Location: 68736 Buddy Rogers Avenue _ Negotiating Parties: , e Agency: Redevelopment Agency i r Property Owner: Palm Canyon Partners '� Under Negotiation: Terms of Disposition and Development ; Agreement � } 5. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government i Code Section 54956.8 � Property: � Location: Northeast Corner of Monty Hall Drive and Buddy Rogers Avenue ; Negotiating Parties: Agency: Redevelopment Agency _ Property Owner: Linc Housing Under Negotiation: Terms of Disposition and Development Agreement ' A. Recommendation: Councilmember/RDA Board Member Pettis ` made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem/RDA Board Member Di Grandi, carried �� by a 5-0 vote, to adjourn to the Study Session Conference Room to hear Closed ; session matters. , CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: Deputy City Attorney Brett Bianco made announcements resulting from actions taken by the City Council/RDA Board during the Closed Session meeting as follows: ;� � � � .. � 7 fi � = CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 ; PAGE 3 � Item No. 2: City Council voted 5-0 to authorize the hiring of Carl ;:� Anderson for auditing purposes with respect to matters � related to city business Item No. 3: Redevelopment Agency Board voted 5-0 to authorize a ; proposal to purchase property from HUD in the amount of � 545,000. � Item No. 4: Redevelopment Agency Board voted 5-0 to authorize the � Redevelopment Agency to expend S245,000 to proceed with final design implementation of the listed property relating $ to a parking structure. � Deputy City Attorney Bianco announced that no other reportable action was � � taken. PUBLIC COMMENTS: a o Bill Beck, Cathedral City - Updated Council and the audience that � his new project known as The Court is totally leased out. He noted :� that he has received calls regarding leasing from as far away as � Seattle, Washington and Arizona. For those who were not aware, � Mr. Beck announced that he has purchased the old Post Office building and is going to renovate it into a food court with such businesses as Polly's Pies, Cremery Ice Cream, Spuds with Duds, Nachos Taqueria, hamburgers, hot dogs, the Butcher Block, the ; Crystal Pistol which is a small beer garden, so there will be ; something for everyone. , , COUNCIL COMMENTS: o Councilmember De Rosa commended Councilmember Gomer for ; his reappointment as CvAG Chair to the Human Resources � Committee and also thanked staff publicly for all of their � assistance in the hosting of the Convention and Visitors' Joint Powers Authority meeting last week. She especially wanted to € thank Elena Van valkenburg for taking care of the setup of the meeting and for doing such a great job. � � o Mayor Amy called on Redevelopment Director Susan Moeller to make an announcement. Director Moeller invited everyone to attend the Fountainworks Event on Monday, July 3, 2000, from ', `� 6:30 to 11:00 p.m. This is the official turning on of the water of � the fountain which is complete and therefore the community celebration. The event is entirely paid for through sponsorships. = We have had S20,500 pledged for the event and have collected, to � date, S14,500 of that amount. we have a total of 49 vendor � spaces, of which 45 have been committed. We are going to have � ; '4 � � CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 PAGE 4 � the Cathedral City Fire Department serving hot dogs and ;� hamburgers; the Rotary Club will have popcorn; there will be a it� beer garden, a wine garden; Wesley's Catering will be offering barbecue beef and chicken sandwiches, barbecued ribs and Italian sausage and pepper sandwiches; Epelles Italian Slushes will be � there; Party Concepts with cotton candy; the Pastry Swan; the Red ' ` Tomato will have strawberry shortcake and there will aiso be pizza. There will be a Dixieland Jazz Band, a Tijuana Band and the U.S. Marine Corps Band, as well as Steve Madao and his group. There will literally be dancing in the streets, under the stars and ; we invite everyone to come and celebrate with us our Fountain of ° Life. Mayor Amy added that the City Manager has promised to s ; control the temperature that evening to keep it cool and the fi speeches will be very short and all will have a good time. Director � Moeller advised those who wish to get wet to bring their bathing r suit and a towel as this is an interactive fountain wherein you will � be able to walk through the falling water. ; o Mayor Amy further announced that the Coachella Valley Housing Coalition has been nominated in the finals for a national award and will hear next week of the outcome. The award is the Maxwell Award of Excellence from the Fanny Mae Foundation for excellence in affordable housing. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS: Certificates of Appreciation to Adam and Meghan 0'Connel! for their heroic � efforts at the scene of the accident involving Police Officer Corwin Deveas were presented by Mayor and City Councilmembers and Chief of Police Stan Henry. d t � CALL FOR APPROVAL/CORRECTIONS TO MINUTES: Minutes of the CC/RDA/CSD Meeting held June 14, 2000, were approved as :; submitted. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Pro Tem Di Grandi made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Gomer, carried by a 5-0 vote, to approve Item No. 3 of the Consent Agenda. = Item Nos. 1, 2 and 4 were pulled by Councilmember De Rosa for further discussion. 1. Authorization to purchase a new self-contained breathing apparatus fill station to replace the department's existing fill station that is 15 years ' old at a cost of $38,520.63; to be funded by the S40,000 grant received £ from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. ;� � � � CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 PAGE 5 I � ' Report was given by Fire Chief Steve Sowles. � � Public Input was opened and closed without comment. ; '� �� Councilmember De Rosa made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Di � Grandi, carried by a 5-0 vote, to approve purchase of noted equipment by ' � Minute Order No. 3�44. 2. Authorization to lease/purchase three, 2000 Ford F-150 pickup trucks j from Palm Springs Motors to replace the existing Code Enforcement Division vehicles, at a bid price of 523,576.78 per vehicle, which will � spread out over a 3-year period, after which the City will own the �� vehicles outright. a Report was made by Fire Chief Steve Sowles. ` Public Input was opened and closed without comment. � � Councilmember Gomer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember De Rosa, carried by a 5-0 vote, to approve purchase of three vehicles by Minute Order NO. 3145. ` 3. Adopted Resolution No. 2000-36 approving changes to the functional classification system of streets and requesting approval and implementation of the changes by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), Caltrans, and the Federal Highway Administration. 4. Approval of Cooperation Agreement with the City of Palm Springs for repair of Ramon Bridge. _ Report was given by City Engineer Dave Faessel. � Public Input was opened and closed without comment. � Councilmember De Rosa made a motion, seconded by Mayor Amy, carried by a 5-0 vote to approve the Cooperation Agreement by Minute Order No. 3146. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 5. General Plan Amendment 00-72 and Change of Zone 00-98: A request to change approximately 40 acres of land from OS/C (Open Space-Cemetery) to BP (Business Park) in the General Plan and from OS (Open Space) in the � � � � CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 � PAGE 6 �} $ Zoning Ordinance and Map to NBP Weighborhood Business Park- Transition), located on the northeast corner of DaVall Road and Ramon �� Road. ; Report was given by City Planner Cynthia Kinser stating that based on a , memo that was distributed to Council earlier which identified that the � Cemetery District owns the property and there is a Health and Safety � Code that identifies that public cemetery districts cannot use the � property for anything other than a cemetery use and cannot lease the property for non-cemetery uses. In this particular case, the applicant is leasing the property and we want verification as to whether this is � surplus land that can be developed or whether the Health and Safety ° Codes issued by the State are applicable. Therefore, staff is asking for a continuance to the July 12, 2000 council meeting for that purpose. � Public Hearing was opened: ; � Sean Mason, City Attorney for City of Rancho Mirage: Stated 3 that it was actually Rancho Mirage who raised this issue and � after the issue was raised late this afternoon he received a fax citing a statute that indicates that some type of leasing for commercial purposes is lawful and legal. He noted that ; he reviewed that statute and feels that it may be legal. � There is an issue about whether it can be done for as long as i 100 years, which is the intent here, so we are still going to , � hash that issue out. He noted he was appreciative of the # Council's consideration to continue this item and he looks forward to speaking on this matter further. � = Public Hearing was closed. � I '� Councilmember Pettis made a motion to continue this Public Hearing until t the next regularly scheduled meeting of July 12, 2000, which was � seconded by Councilmember De Rosa and carried by a 5-0 vote. # 6. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to establish locations and standards for outdoor advertising displays. (1st Reading) 1 � Report was given by City Planner Cynthia Kinser stating that this is a I request to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance to look at standards and locations for outdoor advertising displays. The staff report identifies the alternatives that were presented to the Planning Commission and also, with those alternatives, were options that were presented to them for consideration. Ms. Kinser noted that at the present time there have , been some articles in the newspaper that say the City of Cathedral City �, � - � � � :; � � CC/RDA MINUTES ' JUNE 28, 2000 PAGE 7 � allows displays anywhere. She wished to clarify that statement by noting that the City of Cathedral City only allows displays in two � $ locations which are the Commercial Business Park Zone and the �ight �� Industrial Zone. These zones are primarily located at varner Road and Mountain View and along Perez Road and there are some small pockets � on the south side of East Palm Canyon Drive. The request to amend the ,� City's Zoning Ordinance has been submitted by Martin Communications ' g and when this application came forward, staff came to the City Council � to get a feel of what they thought of this request in terms of some of ' the past history where the City previously had a moratorium on � outdoor advertising displays. Based on that presentation, the City 3 � Council created a committee comprised of Councilmembers Pettis and DeRosa. The committee invited Tom Flanagan of Martin ; ' Communications, Ed Shearer of Fairway Outdoor Advertising, and Patty ! � Drusky of the Chamber of Commerce to attend their meetings. Also in , � attendance at these committee meetings was myself and Associate � Planner Rebecca Maddox. The committee worked through developing $ some standards that if the City were to have an ordinance on the books x that would allow outdoor advertising displays, what would those standards be. Those standards are identified on page 43 of the Council's packet under Alternative 1. This was the language that was developed that identified the location of displays as a possibility; I-10, Date Palm Drive, Varner Road and Ramon Road. It then identified z spacing requirements, height requirements, poles, lighting, setbacks, ; and all those criteria are identified there. Basically, the spacing ` requirement is 500 feet and placement was to have the entire display two feet behind the property line. Ms. Kinser noted a correction in Alternative 1; the committee had discussed a Conditional Use � Application as the application to be presented with these if they were ' allowed and the end action was that the committee recommended a � sign permit. Therefore, Item 0 on Page 45 under Alternative 1 should � reference the application submittal being a sign permit. These � standards were presented to the Planning Commission along with ' Alternative 2. While Alternative 1 looked at allowing displays on the � streets that were identified earlier on non-residential land, Alternative 2 was a method of where we could survey existing displays and then cap ` them and not allow any more displays to be constructed in the City. � Alternative 3 was to prohibit outdoor advertising displays. At the � Planning Commission meeting, when these alternatives were reviewed � by them, they took consideration of Alternative 1 and the work that the ' committee had provided. At the Planning Commission meeting, the applicants requested some alternatives to Alternative 1 to be considered by the Planning Commission and that was to expand the � � � s � � CC/RDA MINUTES �� JUNE 28, 2000 � PAGE 8 � locations to include beyond just Ramon Road, Varner Road, I-10 and Date .�. Palm; to also include a portion of E. Palm Canyon at the City's eastern � boundary. After discussion and evaluating the request, the Planning � �� Commission decided to recommend Alternative 2, which is to survey existing displays and just allow the existing displays to remain in place. � That language was not before the Planning Commission so the matter z was continued and brought back to them as noted on Page 47 of ; Council's packet. Under this provision, staff created language that says } we will survey the existing displays and that we would allow no more displays that identified within the survey and that if a display was � destroyed, removed for whatever reason, that you can reconstruct a � display in the same location that it currently exists. That means, you would not be able to relocate the sign, but only to resurrect the former � display under the standards that have been developed. This is the alternative that the Planning Commission adopted and you have before � you. She also stated that with Alternative 2, again the applicant had � submitted some other alternatives which are identified on Page 50 of Council's packet. City Planner Kinser stated that what is before Council � is a recommendation from the Planning Commission to adopt an ordinance that would allow a survey to be conducted to determine how many displays are currently in the City and allow no more displays than what is identified in that survey and to only allow replacement in the � location that they currently exist, as would be identified in that survey. � -' Ms. Kinser referred Council to the display on the wall behind them � showing displays currently in the City. She noted that there are 49 � displays currently in the City; 18 on non-tribal land and 31 on tribal land. '� Councilmember Pettis stated that he understands that Martin � Communications has some applications in to the City, but requested to � know if Fairway had any applications. � � � City Planner Kinser responded that Martin Communications have � submitted requests for three displays and we have a Conditional Use Permit application to cover those three displays on Ramon Road. We also have, through a settlement agreement with Fairway Outdoor � Advertising, a total of five displays through the agreement of which ,, � three have been erected with two outstanding. � � Mayor Amy read names into the record of communications received ; regarding this issue: Pearl Vargha and Pat Hammers-not supportive of y any new billboards; Tom Ventrone, Manager of America Tires-in support `� of billboards; Nu-way Cleaners-in support; Paul Thiel, President and General Manager of Palm Springs Ford-in support; Octavian Popaluca, � � � � � :� � CC/RDA MINUTES � JUNE 28, 2000 PAGE 9 �� CEO of Zi In - - �, ppy Copy, c. in support, Ron Pennell of Uniform Image in support; Richard Hauke, President of Champion Mitsubishi-in support; � °t Richard Altman of ARA,LLC-in support; Pete Kozlak, Owner of Roger Dunn « J Discount Golf Shop-in support; Steve Eversz, Resident-in support; Diana � L. Keenan, Resident-in support; Steve Levine, Resident-in support; JoDawn Gibson, Resident-in support; Donald Merryman, Resident-in � support; Brian P. McGowan, Resident-in support; Rod Cortez and spouse, � Resident-in support. � } Public Hearing was opened: � Keith Davis, Cathedral City - requested that the City Council ; be most restrictive with billboards stating that he felt they ' are not very attractive, especially near the mountains. He noted that he spoke at the Planning Commission on this �' � matter nothing that if you drive south on Date Palm by the ' wash, there is a new billboard next to the new hotel/gas a� station site and it blocks the view of the mountains and the � Cathedral City Cove. He believes it is a big eyesore at that location and feels it is his least favorite of all the billboards. He again requested that the City Council vote for a most restrictive use of billboards. � Patty Drusky, Executive Director of Cathedral City Chamber of Commerce, Val vista - stated that the Chamber conducted � an random survey at the beginning of June of businesses in � Cathedral City as to their position on billboards. Based on i the results of that survey, the Chamber of Commerce Board � of Directors is supporting the Planning Commission � recommendation. � Chuck vasquez, Cathedral City - stated that he co-chairs the 35th Avenue Neighborhood Watch Group and when this E issue came to them, they asked their members to go out ; i and talk to their parent groups, booster clubs, neighbors � and friends to find out how everyone felt about billboards. The result was unanimous all the way across - no one came back of our 35 members with anything but "no more billboards". If anything, they felt that the current ordinance is not restrictive enough as far as allowing any billboards to be rebuilt. He noted that he has lived in the City 17 years and has not talked to one resident that is in favor of more billboards. � � Bill Cohen, Cathedral City - stated that his feelings on � billboards is enough is enough. The beauty of these = mountains far exceeds the value of billboards, even though ; � � , � � CC/RDA MINUTES � '� JUNE 28, 2000 j :� PAGE 10 � � �; he spent most of his adult life in sales and I realize the '� benefits of advertising, but why disgrace the mountains { ,�� with billboards. He noted that he would rather look at ' mountains than billboards - no more billboards please. � � Tom Flanagan, representing Martin Communications located � at 69930 Highway 111, Suite 211, Rancho Mirage. He noted �' that over a year and a half ago Martin Communications ; approached the City with a proposal to locate three new � ; outdoor advertising displays on non-Indian land within ' Cathedral City. In view of the fact that Cathedral City has ; over 160 miles of roads and only 18 non-Indian signs, they $ felt this was a very reasonable request and still do tonight. � He stated that they had met with staff to discuss sign sites � ; and the best way to seek their entitlement. A course of ' action was outlined and immediately they began to pursue � that course of action. He noted that they filed their ; � applications in early October of 1999; the applications were � accepted as complete and we were scheduled to go to � public hearing in mid-November. At this point, everything that could possibly go wrong, went wrong. The headlines of that period resulting in staff requesting that their ;� applications be delayed while the whole issue of outdoor advertising could be reviewed at a City Council Study - Session. Martin Communications agreed to be patient. The � City Council appointed a sign committee to formulate a � comprehensive, outdoor advertising ordinance. The i ` committee met, basically, every two weeks from early December until May of this year. A sign ordinance was ' drafted that went to the Planning Commission earlier this � month. The staff report detailed that the draft ordinance � ;� could accept the possibility of over 100 new sign locations `� within the City. Unfortunately, Martin Communications was � listed as the applicant. In actuality, all Martin ' Communications has ever tried to accomplish is to build three signs in Cathedral City. We began this project as a result of many and repeated requests from the commercial � community of Cathedral City to provide advertising space to identify themselves and direct the traveling public to their businesses. The major thoroughfares of the City can ; become a significant asset to these businesses through � outdoor advertising. We feel that our project is an excellent � = opportunity for the City to assist the commercial � community in achieving much needed outdoor advertising 3 � � i p f # -i .� � '� CC/RDA MINUTES � JUNE 28, 2000 ' PACE 'I'1 : space. Martin Communications has always endeavored to be a good citizen in Cathedral City. Our involvement in the City � is well known. We believe we have demonstrated our ;� concern for the welfare of Cathedral City on many, many � occasions. It is for this reason that it is important for the �? community to understand that we have always advocated � reasonable and restrictive growth of outdoor advertising. Mr. Flanagan noted that he appears before the City Council ; tonight to ask them for guidance on how they can accomplish their goal. We realize how difficult the timing is and in spite of the timing, we believe our request is reasonable. We hope the Council can explore some _ alternatives that will allow us to finish what we began a year j ago, while at the same time, protecting the community. As ' � always, we are willing to listen and to compromise. ; Public Hearing was closed. f , � � Mayor Amy commended the subcommittee for their work on this � matter, as well as the Planning Commission. Both have done a very good job and I am appreciative of what they brought forward to the Council. He noted that it looks like we have a potential end in sight, if � you will, a cap. We have a solution before us to prevent billboards on ; non-Indian land. We still have billboards on Indian land, of which ; everyone knows we have no control over. It's a good news, bad news � thing - the bad news is we don�t have control over them, but the good '� news is with adoption of Proposition 1A, the tribes have become much more prosperous and they are going to be developing their properties. As they develop their properties, the billboards located on that land will go away. � � Councilmember Gomer concurred with most of what Mayor Amy said � � and wanted to also bring up the fact that Martin Communications has � played a very active part in the community and has been very supportive of Cathedral City. However, having said that, and as the newest person to sit on the Council, much of what has happened in Cathedral City happened before I came to this position. I would say that even if every billboard that is now currently in place in Cathedral City were advertising a business that was in Cathedral City or a cause that ' related directly to Cathedral City, I still would be opposed to the proliferation of additional billboards in this City. Having said that, I have � studied carefully the proposal that has come forward from our Planning R Commission. I feel that even though it is in many ways unfair to Martin Y? Communications who has been waiting in line for this, that it is � i CClRDA MINUTES ; JUNE 28, 2000 � PAGE 12 probably a good way for us to go. i would ask that the City Council move forward and recommend that we waive further reading and F � introduce this ordinance. Councilmember De Rosa seconded Councilmember Gomer's motion. She stated that Martin Communications has been a very big supporter of this community and to me personally in my campaign and thanked them for that. She noted that she was elected to represent what tne people want, not what I want. She expressed that she is here as the � peoples' representative. She has done a lot of asking around, looked at � the survey from the Chamber very long and hard, spoken to many people and if I am to do their will, then I have to second this motion. Councilmember Pettis made a motion to amend Section 19.03.07.01 to add subsection 19.03.07.02 as follows: A. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING DISPLAYS. NO more than twenty-three outdoor advertising displays are permitted on land under the jurisdiction of the City of Cathedral City, not including the land controlled by tne Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. B. SURVEY. A survey shall be conducted that provides a photograph of each dispfay, the focation of each dispfay, the owner of the display, and whether the display is on tribal land. The locations and maximum number of displays permitted within the City shall be as defined in the survey. C. I.00ATI4N. The maximum number of outdoor advertising displays reflects applications in process at the time of � adoption of this ordinance (18 existing, 5 under application). The displays under applications shall be permitted only on Ramon Road in non-residential zones, specifically identified as PCC (Planned Community CommerciaU, PLC (Planned l.imited Commercial), and OS (Open Space). Said applications shall adhere to the standards set forth herein, in addition, � no display shall be located within 500 lineal feet of another display on the same side of the street. The outdoor advertising display survey shall be amended to reflect tnese displays. Thereafter, twenty-three outdoor advertising displays, not on tribal land, snall be permitted to be maintained and replaced to the standards set forth in Section 19.03.07.02. � A short break was taken to discuss Councilmember Pettis' ; amendment. Upon return, Councilmember Pettis apologized to r � � � � � , €. � � i CC/RDA MINUTES � `= JUNE 28� 2000 � , PAGE 13 ; his colleagues as they did not have a copy of the language he recited before just now. He announced that what the bottom :� line is for what he is recommending in his amended motion is to � process five applications that are already in process and allow � those to go through the system. Two of those are Fairway to � finish up the settlement agreement as a result of a law suit and � the other three are with Martin Communication to allow them to � go through the Conditional Use Permit process. I have made it ' clear to Mr. Martin probably almost two years ago that I do not � � like billboards and would love to see them eliminated from the � desert because of the view lines and everything else. He has $ reiterated at discussion at subcommittee meetings that certainly � this year has not been a good one for the City as related to billboards and all the press and everything that has gone along. ; However, I remember just before I came on Council, now almost � six years ago, that the City passed a moratorium on adult � entertainment businesses after an application for a license was � submitted to the City. We immediately were in Federal Court and � after hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, we lost, and ended up with several more adult entertainment businesses from what the City had anticipated. That has stayed with me and not # :i that Martin Communications has threatened us at all with legal � action, but Fairway certainly has a history of that, not only in this '° city, but from what we read in the newspaper today, with our � neighboring city. Those kinds of things stick with me and I can�t see us going down that path again to unlimited legal battles, when this is something we can finally come to grips with and � � stop. We have always said there will be no billboards on East Palm � Canyon, we have removed the ones that are there, we are not # going to allow anymore there. This will stop construction of � billboards on Date Palm, which is our other scenic view. � Eventually, as the Indians develop, those signs will come down. = We are not going to allow any on Landau. This will finally, once and for all, start the process going the other way around. It is not � �� perfect by any means and I certainly would like it to be different than what it is, but I think by saying that we are capping it at 23; � we are not going to allow replacement as defined by some people � of moving things when they have to go. Saying that this is the top limit, I think we will begin to see an end to this. He again 5 apologized to Council for the last minute amendment. �: � Councilmember DeRosa stated that she would also like to see in � the amendment that these billboards are up before the end of � � � � � � '� � , � .z � ; CC/RDA MINUTES � JUNE 28� 2000 � `� PAGE 14 � � the year; that they are up and completed within the next three or � four months, so that if this does pass that by the end of the year ; � 2000, it is off our radar screen. ;� -� Councilmember Gomer stated that he guesses it is a given that we ! � are going to get two more displays based upon the settlement � agreement with Fairway. The actual question is whether or not � we permit three additional displays requested by Martin � Communications and, if we deny them, are we asking for litigation � and, as someone said, unlimited legal battles. He noted that he ' � does not want to sit here and lead us in that direction, however, he is not clear that if we approve the ordinance as amended, that '� it will preclude additional litigation on this matter. Perhaps the ; City Attorney could enlighten us in this regard. � � Deputy City Attorney Brett Bianco stated that there is always the i possibility that litigation may exist down the road. The best I can � tell you is that, on its face, this appears to be a legally valid , � ordinance and that includes the language which Mr. Pettis is , � adjusting as part of the amendment. So, on its face, I think it � would be a legally valid ordinance. � .� Councilmember Gomer responded that we have no guarantee with this ordinance that we won't be subject to lawsuits, so I :� would like to reiterate that I am opposed to continuing to proliferate outdoor displays and that would be my position at this point in time unless there were some legal guarantee that this j ` would end the matter. ! i ; :� Mayor Pro Tem Di Grandi thanked the committee and everyone �, � who has diligently worked with the issues of the billboards. She ! � stated that many times as she is driving through the valley, reading billboards is how she finds out different activities going on. She noted that she is not a promoter of 200 billboards. She wants to promote the protection of the area. She noted that we have 18 billboards on non-Indian land and 31 billboards on Indian � land. She asked everyone if they have notice how fast the valley's growth is progressing and due to the casino being constructed on Bob Hope, there are about 20+ billboards coming down. , t Eventually, the same thing will happen in Cathedral City. She feels � z at this time, we have to settle the Fairway lawsuit and that Martin ' � � Communications has an entitlement, as they have been working � on this for well over a year. Mayor Pro Tem Di Grandi stated she � � j � � I � � CC/RDA MINUTES '' JUNE 28, 2000 � PAGE '15 � b � would like to see the billboard number capped and that we move � on. � q 5 ;� Mayor Amy called for the motion on the Councilmember Pettis' � original amendment and Councilmember DeRosa's addition to � that amendment regarding the time limit of placing the displays � within the next three or four months or November, 2000. A � question was presented as to a more specific date for the ' completion of these projects. Mayor Amy called forward the representatives of the two billboard companies to respond to � that request. � 0 Tom Flanagan, Martin Communications - stated that in the interest � of clarity, three or four months leaves a little bit to be desired � ; and would prefer to see a date certain that he could react to and his preference for that was December 31, 2000. Dave Milner, General Manager of Fairway Outdoor Advertising - he stated that whatever works, but it would be preferable for them as well to have the December 31, 2000 date. The amendment to the original motion was adopted by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers DeRosa and Comer voting no. The original motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance was passed by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers DeRosa and Gomer voting no. � � � LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS: 7. Mid-Valley Parkway: Approval of closure concepts for Linda Way, Judy Lane and Vaquero Road at Dinah Shore Drive; approval of raised median islands on Dinah Shore Drive; and, permission to advertise for bids for Dinah Shore widening, street closures and median construction. i � E Report was given by City Engineer Faessel and Associate Engineer Jerry � Jack. � Public Input was opened: � � Mary Highland, Vaquero Road, Cathedral City - stated � Vaquero Road is now a high speed street. Her concern or � question is are you going to open up Corrigedor? Associate s Engineer .1ack responded that vaquero and Corrigedor � � � � � �. f � :� I � CC/RDA MINUTES � JUNE 28 2000 ,; � �� PAGE 16 � , ;� would be open at Dinah Shore. , _ � Ron Shonk, Linda Way, Cathedral City - appreciated in being ' 4 part of the hearing that brought us to this point today. , Stated that when the three homes were demolished, there � was an increase of traffic noise in their home. They are � hoping that some of that will be addressed with walling and .� planting. Feels a little uneasy as a homeowner at this � address both for the value of the property and just the ' pleasure of living in that location, that we still have some � � input before final things happen, so they are not left with a � noisier, dirtier location than they moved into. Associate 7 Engineer Jack responded by stating that typically on a street � widening of this sort, once we get to the design detail, then � we will approach the individual homeowner or business � owner that fronts that property because we will be " impacting their landscaping and will do our best to match � � or enhance what they have so it looks contiguous to their � frontage. As far as walls go, all of these homes front their � � :3 driveways onto the side street so therefore they are ; oriented to the side street. Mr. Jack also noted that staff I `; has already spoken to CVAG and if we need to do soundwalls � or something other than a six-foot garden wall, that will be � incorporated into the design. Mr. Jack noted that he is not � an acoustic engineer and he is not aware of all the details of � how that is going to be decided. we have also spoken to ' � CVAG about other noise proofing methods such as replacing ; the windows on that side of the house with triple pane or � something which is also available in the funding. ; � Chuck Vasquez, Cathedral City - As has already been stated, � we have a very heavy traffic problem on vaquero as it is and � with this we will be increasing it by some 35%. At the other ! � end of Vaquero, where it deadends by Nilda, we have a � pedestrian gate opening for the new elementary school, � 1� which means we will have the majority of the elementary school children from that area either walking down Vaquero ` or Plumley twice a day. Plumley is already a nightmare. He noted he has just recently spoken with Chief of Police Henry � about some of the problems they are having there. With putting all those children out there, he feels we need to ' ; address some more traffic calming devices on Vaquero to ; ; deal with the protection of these children. ' � Name Undecipherable, Judy Lane, Cathedral City - stated ; that when he attended the meetings last year, he was under � � � :� , _� �� � CC/RDA MINUTES � JUNE 28, 2000 , � PACE 17 , i 3 , the impression that the end of the cul-de-sacs were going to � ; be high walls. That there would be high sound walls all the � � way across. He also noted that where the wall would be � there would be a separation between the two streets and � � � there is a concern that the high school children would hang � .� � out in that area. Associate Engineer Jerry Jack advised that I this would not happen. ' � � Keith Davis, Cathedral City - He is a member of the Streets � and Transportation Commission and stated they are , � constantly being faced with residents who are upset about speeding cars and he thinks that the radar cart that the � Police Department puts out is enough of a warning. It has � been used on every street where complaints have been expressed. He stated that he has said many times that he ; feels the Police Department needs to use the motorcycles in � the residential areas and give tickets to people who are � speeding. Most neighbors will tell you that it's the same � �� cars, at the same hours that are going 40, 50 and some 60 miles per hour in a 25-mile-an-hour zone. He stated that he 'a really encourages tickets to be issued in residential r neighborhoods. -° � Susan Moeller, �inda Way, Cathedral City - She noted that � x � having two teenage sons, one of which is on his bicycle � almost 24 hours a day it seems - on the sidewalk, along Dinah � Shore, especially on the south side, is it possible to meander ` that or to have a parkway between the sidewalk and Dinah Shore so that the children are protected more by a � greenbelt from the traffic because the traffic will increase 3 in that area. That is why the Mid-Valley Parkway is being put = in, to accommodate more and faster traffic and I think that ' would provide somewhat of a barrier and protection both � ' for the children on foot and for those who ride bicycles. Public Input was closed. � � �: Councilmember Gomer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember De Rosa, carried by a 5-0 vote to approve the three requests by Minute Order No. 3147. 8. Proposed Big League Dreams Loan Guarantee Extension to be phased } out over the next four years. RDA Board Member Di Grandi and RDA Board Member DeRosa abstained from discussion on this matter ` due to their business association with Big �eague Dreams. � R � -tl � CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 PACE 18 � � { Report was given by Economic Development Manager Paul Shilicock. � � � .� Public Input was opened: � � Bill Cohen, Cathedral City - Requested City Council to get the , parking lot situation corrected at the �eague/Library ; location. Public Input was closed. ; RDA Board Member Pettis made a motion, seconded by RDA Board Member E Gomer, carried by a 3-0 vote, with RDA Board Members Di Grandi and DeRosa ! abstaining, to approve the Big League Dreams �oan Guarantee extension by ; Resolution No. R-304 � 9. Adoption of City Council Policies and Procedures. Report was given by Deputy City Attorney Brett Bianco. Public Input was opened and closed without comment. Councilmember DeRosa noted that in Section 14.7 there is a notation stating "due process as determined by the City Attorney". Can you give me an idea of what that means? Deputy City Attorney Bianco stated that he believed it was Councilmember DeRosa's suggestion at the last meeting. He noted that she had some concerns as to exactly what was an official reprimand and exactly what the mechanics would be and you asked that we kind of spell that out a little in more detail so that there would be more guidance should this situation ever arise. He reported that they had discussed this matter in the City Attorney's office and came to the opinion that it would be very, very difficult to have boiler plate provisions as to what an official reprimand should be because every situation is going to be different. So if we spelled out the procedures you must follow - for example - if the Mayor was the non-offending party - the Mayor would draft a written reprimand, serve that on the person who committed the act, give copies to the remaining members of Council, then come into open session and have the opportunity to discuss it. The problem that you run into is depending on the circumstance, we cannot be having that type of information disclosed. For example, if this was an item that concerned pending litigation, which obviously would be in closed session, and that is what we are � talking about, because this deals with disclosing information in the � context of a closed session. We cannot be giving too much information � � P �, � � � CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 ':� PACE 19 � , � out in the form of a written reprimand. So depending on what it is � going to be, we will need to specifically tailor each official reprimand r� according to the circumstances. Therefore the language we decided to � x� put in this document is simply the Council essentially should consult ° with the City Attorney so that we can make sure that due process rights of the individual who is being accused are met in each circumstance; but, it gives Council the flexibility to tailor each reprimand to the specific circumstance with the recommendation of the City Attorney so `"`� that we don't run into those situations where we disclose more � information than we should be. It is intentionally left vague in this � document. � � Councilmember DeRosa stated she just wanted to understand what the 'F statement meant by due process. Whose due process..the City { � Attorney's due process, a legislative due process, a legal due process, � Council due process...whose due process. � Deputy City Attorney Bianco replied that essentially the person who � = would be entitled to due process considerations would be the individual who is being accused of some wrongdoing. We would need to ensure that not only that person is receiving due process, but also � that confidentiality of the Council is maintained and that other g procedures are followed according to applicable rules. Also, it is worth ; noting that there are no existing case law or statutes which give � guidance right now as to the direction the Council should take in these ; types of situations. � Councilmember DeRosa made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem DI � � Grandi, carried by a 5-0 vote, to adopt this document by Resolution No. ; 2000-37. 3 � 10. Proposed amendment to the City Council Travel Policy. Report was given by Deputy City Attorney Brett Bianco. Public Input was opened and closed without comment. Councilmember Pettis reminded Council that they had discussed in Study Session today that they wanted to also put restrictions relating to i partisan political events as well as religious events. Under Section 9, � Non-Reimbursable Expenses, the City Attorney has suggested that the ¢ following be added to Subsection (b): "including, but not limited to functions wherein the primary purposes to support, advance or � � CCIRDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 PAGE 20 encourage a political party, pofitical cause, promote in any way a candidate for political office or any function wherein the primary purpose or content is religiously based". Councilmember DeRosa wanted to look at Section 8, Reimbursable Expenses. We have one for personal automobile mileage for non-local travel and then personal automobile mileage for local travel. She requested that Subsection (2) be stricken and make all travel, both local and non-local, at 32.5 cents a mile, which is the IRS amount. We need to turn in mileage reports as to where we have been and what the mileage for that amounts to. She feels that 5200 a month is too much for local travel. She also feels that cell phone bills are very inappropriate and would like to see us limit Council's cell phones to the package of S50-S60 dollars a month which is a package of approximately 400 minutes for City related business and anything over that are personal calls. Sne advised that the City of Palm Springs does not have a cell phone policy, they do not pay for it; Rancho Mirage does not pay for it; Palm Desert will pay only so mucn per month and approximately $60 per month for Councilmembers; Indio does not do it; Desert Hot Springs does not do it. We are not a rich City. I know this is a sore subject and a touchy issue, but I do not feel that it is appropriate. Sitting at budget meetings last night and the four or five budgets that we nave gone over, we have allocated for cell phones roughly 510,000 and we haven't finished yet. That is a!ot of money for cell phones. Again, this is something I am sure I will not get concurrence on; however, I feel that the use of cell phones and the money that this Council spends is inappropriate. Some cell phones are well within budget, S50-$60 a month is not unreasonable; but S200-$300 a month is inappropriate. It has become a way of life and is convenient, but if you can't do it in private business, you snouldn't be able to do it in government. Her third request is submitting receipts for credit card expenditures. After a trip, she feels Council should be required to turn in all the receipts, whether they be cash or credit card to match up with the expenses that have been paid. That is not a policy that has been enforced and she would like to see it enforced. �j Councilmember Pettis stated he nas no problem the third request of turning in receipts. He stated that he cannot go along with the other � two requests because he knows he is putting in well over 600 miles per � month locally. ` � Councilmember Gomer concurred with Councilmember DeRosa � regarding submittal of receipts. I do have a problem with the extra � paperwork required for automobile expenses which is just one more � � i � , CC/RDA MINUTES JUNE 28, 2000 PAGE 21 thing along with all the other paperwork involved. The hassle of the paperwork required to keep track of mileage is worth the 5200 expense; however, in all fairness, he noted he understands Ms. DeRosa's point inasmuch as if someone is exceeding the 640 miles a month, they should be fully reimbursed for that and I would expect that we should incorporate that into our policy so people have that option, but if they wanted more than the 5200, it would have to be based on a written report. As far as limitations on cell phones, he has no problem with that change. He has incorporated two lines into one phone so that he can separate his City business calls from his personal ones. The point is that there is an excessive amount of cell phone use and we need to make sure that those cell phone calls that are being made personally are paid for personally. He encouraged the other Council to get a cell phone with two lines on it so it becomes easy then to separate the two. Mayor Amy made a motion to adopt the Travel and Business Expense Policies, Rules, Regulations and Procedures for the Mayor, City Council, City Clerk and City Treasurer, with amendments as proposed by the language provided by the City Manager for Section 7(A) & 7(B) of the Budget and language provided by the City Attorney for Section 9(B). Motion passed by a 4-1 vote, with Councilmember De Rosa voting no, to adopt the above noted motion by Resolution No. 2000-38. Councilmember DeRosa made a motion to amend changing Section 8(E) regarding cell phones and limit that to either two lines to break it up or to limit cell phone use to not-to-exceed S75 per month to be charged to the City. Councilmember Gomer seconded the motion to amend. Motion failed by 3-2 vote, with Mayor Amy, Mayor Pro Tem Di Grandi and Councilmember Pettis voting no. 11. Consideration of adoption of Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Operating Budget. Administrative Services Director Dudley Haines announced that due to the fact that the budget is not ready, the City Attorney has a measure � � that the Council should take. � Mayor Amy read into the record three resolutions for the Council's Consideration: 1) A Resolution of tne City Council of Cathedral City, California, Authorizing the Continuation of Necessary and Essential Expenditures to Operate the City of Cathedral City Until Such Time as a Formal Budget is Adopted for Fiscal Year 2000-2001; 2) A Resolution of � the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Cathedral City, California, Authorizing the Continuation of Necessary and Essential Expenditures to � � � E � � :� � � , a � � � � CC/RDA MINUTES � JUNE 28, 2000 � � PAGE 22 � Operate the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Cathedral City Until � � Such Time as a Formal Budget is Adopted for Fiscal Year 2000-2001; 3) A Resolution of the Community Services District of the City of Cathedral � City, California, Authorizing the Continuation of Necessary and Essential � Expenditures to Operate the Community Services District of the City of Cathedral City Until Such Time as a Formal Budget is Adopted for Fiscal Year 2000-2001. � Public Input was opened: # � Bill Cohen, Cathedral City - stated he has been retired for almost nine years. When I was working, I had a 525,000 per year expense account. They limited us to S24 a day for � meals. Mileage was 21 cents per mile. I realize it has been � nine years. They also did not pay our cell phone bills which � were 5.91 per minute back then. Just a statement for perspective. Public Input was closed. Motion was made by Councilmember/RDA Board Member Pettis, seconded by � Councilmember/RDA Board Member Gomer, carried by a 5-0 vote to adopt � Resolution No. 2000-39, Resolution No. R-305 and Resolution No. C-181. � ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for discussion, this meeting was adjourned at � 11:00 p.m. �� �� � Donna M. Velotta, City Clerk � :� � � � � � � °� :� � :� � � ;,; f � � �